First DAC is $4000 … daaaamn. Mine was a Geshelli Labs J2 at circa $500 and a LPS circa $160, so circa $660. I picked the wrong career path to get a first DAC at $4000!
I think most of the price of that J2 is the woodworking, IIRC… unless you upgraded the OPAMPs or something? My J1 was closer to $250 DACs in excess of $500 are a waste of money
Not necessarily a waste, but absolutely encountering diminishing returns ... 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘪𝘧𝘪 (save perhaps acoustic treatment, which is likely a linear, 1:1 relationship).
@@ocelotxpDACs in excess of $1000 are NOT a waste of money if the rest of your system - and your ears - can tell they make a positive influence on the realism of the sound. It's all about buying price commensurate pieces of gear so there are no bottlenecks in your overall system. If you have a $2000 amp, a $1500 preamp, and $5000 speakers, you'd be foolish to feed them with a $500 DAC when you could double that and hear a marked difference in sound quality and enjoyment. People spend $30K on a car and get maybe four years use from it. You can spend half that on a very good stereo system and get 25 years use out of it.
Most people will seriously struggle to buy a DAC in the $500 to $1,500 range. I can't imagine spending $4,000 on a first DAC, especially when DAC technology changes so fast.
@@ocelotxpi'm inclined to say you are right but the stellar gold pro or whatever it is called is class a with 4 dac chips per channel, I really want to listen to something like that
Hi Paul! I think you gave a really great advice here. I am a proud owner of the MKII and I believe it is one of the best DAC's in the world that money can buy. But I would not recommend it for someone to buy as its very first DAC. This is really very advanced stuff...!!!
I never thought I would own anything PS Audio, but I really enjoy my Stellar Gaincell DAC. It replaced a Denafrips Venus II 12th DAC, something I never saw coming. I use vintage gear, currently a 1970 Sansui 4000 stereo receiver, and use the Gaincell for my digital gear. It took quite a few years, and tens of thousands of dollars, but I finally have the sound I have been looking for. I am running the Zu DW6 Supreme speakers.
My starter setup also using Sansui paired with PS Audio DAC. 😄A recommendation from a local hifi dealer. I'm running Sansui AU217 & PS Audio Digital Link III. I hope one day I can buy the higher tier dac from PS audio
@@jlmjloi4533I am thoroughly impressed with the Gaincell, it is simply buttery smooth, no digital harshness that I have experienced with other chip DACs. And with the Sansui, simply incredible, it brings out all of that magic the Sansui is known for and keeps that airy tube like sound pouring out of my Zu speakers. I never thought I would sell my Venus II 12th DAC for a used $800 Gaincell, but here we are. This is one of those DACs that I simply do not see leaving, it does everything right and is very honest. I forget the engineers name that developed the Gaincell, he is now over at Parasound as the head engineer. That guy knows his stuff.
I'm sure all three DACs offered by PS Audio are great, perhaps "stellar", at their price points. But after learning about DACs over the last 5 years, I'm still confused as to what we gain from the various architectures used by engineers. Why for instance, are R2R DACs reputed to have a more "natural tonality, wider soundstage, and better imaging" than similarly priced chip-based alternatives? Is this RUclips reviewer hype or is it real, and if real, what is the technical explanation for it? Why would an old architecture like R2R that was superseded long ago by chip-based designs be "better"? And what is going on with the programming in a FPGA that does the D to A conversion that makes it better than what is designed into say an ESS, AKM, or Burr Brown chip that has the same job to do? Thanks. And thanks for the explanation about how important the output stage is to what we hear.
The short answer is a lot confirmation bias is at play, and people buy into the marketing; even manufacturers. If manufacturers published video footage of people doing blind tests and choosing the more expensive or even different dacs consistently they would make way more sales. But for some reason you never see that, I wonder why 😏
@@harackmw but some reviewers do comparison tests to ekk out the differences they hear, and come to these conclusions. Yes, if they did double blind tests it would be more truthful, but some try very hard to not be biased. I just watched a review of a comparison between a Denafrips Ares 12th and a Gustard R26, and the reviewer preferred the cheaper Ares, but mentioned the Gustard did offer a much larger soundstage. It just wasn't as tonally accurate.
Let your ears do the work. Order multiple DACs (with generous return policies) and compare them in your system in real time. Invite a friend over and set up your own double blind test.
Yes! I have been thinking the same thing Mike! Being pushed to get into Streaming etc. I decided to take a step back and I just purchased what I hope will be my last Digital setup! The industry has gotten out of hand to say the least! I just found some matching pieces from the early 2000's. A Meitner DAC and SACD Transport that are made to work together! For the price of just 1 DAC I was looking at I bought both pieces for a lot less! Cudos to you Mike for standing up to the Hi Fi hype!
Those three points Paul outlines is what the community is wanting to know about what makes DACS different interns of sound and price 1) Output stage 2) Operation Amp selection 3) DAC operation (Single Chip vs Multi Chip vs FPGA vs other). Thanks Paul.
I would go for a Chinese hi end dac. Half the money, double the pleasure. I've bought a fenomenal LKS MH-DA004 and I can't be happier. Denafrips DACs are also outstanding.
It’s half the money, you think you got a deal until it breaks. Then you realize how difficult Chinese customer support is, and sometimes they blame you for the issue or very unresponsive.
Stellar Gold sounds like a winner. Am I correct that Darren Myers designed the output stage along the lines of his phono preamp? IMHO, 4 factors determine the sound of a DAC. The DAC, the output stage, the power supplies, and the phase noise of the clock/data input. The 5th factor is packaging to isolate RF, EMI and vibration.
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio Thanks for your reply. I wish I could say I was an engineer, but alas, I worked in the parts department and shipping. Was surrounded by people who DID put the synthesizers together.
The DAC market is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Either they sound the same or they sound worse than the cheaper sub $500 DAC. If you can disable and completely bypass these internal DACs, your sound would be upgraded with any external. There is so much snake oil in the hifi market, the dac suffers with it the most. Electrical isolation would be the best thing you can do. Im not talking about your AC power.
I *think* some or maybe all of PS Audio's DACs do some opto-isolation (galvanic isolation) from the inputs before the signal gets to the DAC chip or FPGA, hence the noise floor is lowered.
Yeah, agree. But no need of electrical isolation unless you deal with broken or badly designed equipment, async USB is the way to go. A good sub 500$ DAC is already better than human ears and analog components at any price point. I paid 800$ for a Topping D70 Pro Sabre because i wanted 12V trigger, a cheaper model would've been as good.
‘Courtesy DAC’……that is a good term , Paul. My ‘high end’ McIntosh SACD player has one of those. Sounds like hash and grain. As far from high end as you could get. High end CD players are a joke. A quality DAC is definitely necessary.
I own the Gaincell, purchased used for $800 last year, I really like it. It replaced a Denafrips Venus II 12th, I cannot see the new Stellar Gold $4000 DAC in my system any time soon, if ever. Diminishing returns comes to mind... There is no way I am going to get a $3200 sound quality improvement over what the Gaincell is already doing. Personally, I think the Gaincell is a hidden gem in regards to DACs.
Would a built in DAC in my (Audiolab 6000A Play amp) be any better than the DAC in my SAMSUNG tablet? Reviewers seem to like the Audiolab built in DAC.
If you create your soundcard with 2 mic/line ins and 4 outs + 2 headphone outputs, and sound quality that up to your standarts, how much it will costs? And also, are you capable to produce drivers similar to RME, because while I hate their interfaces, they have steller drivers.
Do you have to rely on the built-in amp with the dac chip or can you just run the dac and feed it to your own amp, is that what you're doing Paul? Instead of the programmable chip why don't you just go discrete and make the dac discrete, thats similar to a ladder dac isn't it that works in the same way.
He explained... they use a discrete chip in the Gaincell and Stellar. Their flagship uses software developed in house. Most people find the MKII the best sounding and it has the advantage of OTA software upgrades as enhancements are developed.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w yes but which stage of amplification is discrete? What's my question Is he just using the dac chip as a dac chip without its amplifier, because the signal is very small or he's just using the dac part of the chip, without the amplifier, and building his own amplifier discreetly he didn't explain this.
@@hoobsgroove I don't know enough about the ESS chip to comment on any output stage it has built in. Typically there is at least a buffer after a DAC chip to drive the cables and preamp. I believe he claimed the output amp/buffer uses a discrete amp on all three of their DACs.
As an older technology surpassed by the chip-based DACs or those with custom programming done "better" in a FPGA chip by those who are capable of doing that. The problem with R2R DACs, according to Paul and others, is that it is very hard to get the values of the resistors all within specs. In general, it can be said that R2R DACs are "smoother" sounding perhaps, because of their nature. That smoothness fools many into thinking they sound more "analog", but not really. One issue with their "smoothness" is the lack of bass slam (that's painting with a large brush in generalities, I can only speak about the ones I've heard). Sort of like comparing a Magnepan speaker with one having a 12" bass driver. Both can sound good - even great - but you have to choose what is important to you. As Paul has explained, the power supply in a DAC and its output stage and how well isolated everything is goes a long way to making one DAC sound different than another. I was looking at a R2R DAC in the $2000 range but now am looking more at something like PS Audio's Gaincell DAC.
Sorry, but your suppositions aren't true. Trained musicians CAN tell which instrument is being played due to its tonality. So can "audiophiles" or those who have decent ears and learn what to listen for. It is easy to tell the difference between two violins, acoustic guitars, or mandolins. They don't sound the same at all. People can hear differences in the presentation of sound between DACs (tonality, soundstage, imaging, how "dark" the background is, how etched the beginning of notes are, how natural is the decay, etc)., and yes, even cables. But no, you don't need to spend $1000 on some RCA interconnects. There is however a huge gain to be made in throwing away the cheap ones and buying some in the $30 range from say, Worlds Best Cables using Amphenol connectors.
Ha Ha! I have had more than a few DACs through here, no blind tests needed to hear the difference. I may not be able to tell you who makes it, but I darn sure can hear the difference they make when speakers are in play. You may want to park the oscilloscope and purchase some speakers.
That's the issue in a nutshell and why there is such a difference as you go up the ladder in price. Cheaper DACs often color the sound in some way, either too thin and analytical sounding - which is what Topping and SMSL thought "audiophiles" wanted a few years ago, or intentionally warm and syrupy. Then there is the noise floor (how quiet the background is) which is mostly due to the quality of the power supply and isolation. Then we have how natural the tonality is - does it sound like a real instrument, assuming the rest of the system is as revealing, how natural the attack and decay of notes sound, how wide the soundstage and how good the imaging. At some point it is almost like they should split DACs into two boxes. One doing the D to A conversion and another box that does the preamplification and let us decide how far up the price ladder we want to go with each.
What a money making racket. They forced digital on everyone which has caused vinyl record prices to sell for 3000% markup, plus the new pressings are crap. Now we are being forced to pay astronomical amount of money to convert digital back to analog via DAC's. What's even worse is no matter which over-priced medium you choose, 80-90% of the time the source recording is garbage, therefore the CD, SACD, Vinyl, etc. is horrible. The latest scam is they are using crappy digital source recordings and pressing it onto vinyl.
Yup, then audiophiles miss that warm chill sound their vinyl used to make and spend thousands or more trying to "warm up" their overly sterile systems to get back there again, or aren't smart enough to realize that is why they can't connect with their music anymore: the gear and fear of missing out takes centerstage instead
Or you can see the upside which is that high quality digital playback is now the best of both worlds: the natural, pleasing aspects of analog with the precision and accessibility of digital tools. Try an Aurender server feeding a solid DAC and you'll hear what I mean.
@@Foxtrot1967 I use it and find it AOK even though MQA never impressed me (they now seem to be abandoning it in favor or normal flac files). Qobuz does seem to have more high res files right now and is definitely better for classical.
Audio manufacturers don't actually design their own DACs, they buy DAC chipsets and output amps from other suppliers. The only difference is the cost of the chipset, one of the best costs $91. PS Audio doesn't even make the FPGA they use in one of their DACs, they buy it. There's no reason that a mid-priced DAC can't perform as well as DACs costing 10 times more.
What are you talking about, Mark? We "buy" a premade FPGA? Yes, and we buy premade resistors and capacitors too. The Xilinx FPGA we buy is empty. No code. The DAC is completely hand coded from the very beginning. You make it sound as if we buy an off the shelf FPGA that just makes a DAC. Please, keep your facts straight. Thanks.
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio While PS Audio writes the FPGA code, and FPGA DACs used to be much better than audio DAC chipsets, they aren't any longer. There is a big problem with FPGAs. FPGAs have massive computing power but they're optimized for calculation performance, NOT for noise performance. They introduce noise from non-useful elements. In DAC chipsets, everything is there for a purpose and signal and power flows are optimized to reduce noise. The newest DAC chipsets are better than FPGAs for noise and just as good for fidelity at a much lower cost. With the same filtering the two can sound virtually identical. If PS Audio would actually do blind listening tests with a large number of audiophiles, you'd find that out.
@@dornauge1995 It's easy to make different amps sound different. Bob Carver proved that. He took a mid-Fi amplifier and made it sound indistinguishable from a $10,000 amp with simple changes to the mid-Fi amp's transfer function. It stood up in double-blind listening tests conducted by Stereophile. That's the point, modestly priced DACs made with the latest chipsets can be made indistinguishable from (or even perhaps preferable to) extremely expensive DACs with FPGA technology, and are actually slightly better on technical measures that people are unable to hear.
No dacs are not worth it as more than half the music in recording studios is brick walled It’s starts in the studio And ends up on hifi costing a fortune not all songs are recorded equally
Hey, actually that's not entirely true, at least with this video - - I knew the guy yapping about off the shelf stuff was wrong - I'm amazed but pleased Paul set the record straight. btw, completely different subject, nothing to do with you, I'm just sayin' - - no big shocker that this video brought out the hatters ! ( : Gawd, nothing like a DAC discussion to get things going - - - and it's a good thing Paul didn't elaborate on his power cable insight at the beginning of the vid - that woulda brought down the internet servers! Gawd, I'll never get it, if a person really thinks, and I'll say or give in and use the word "generally" that a hundred dollar DAC can compete with a reference rig, then why would they be watching this in the 1st place? Let alone sling mud around implying everyone else that doesn't agree is somehow hypnotized. Anyway, happy listening and I'm with you - just-enjoy-the-music. Cause ya, in the end I can get my rocks off to my stock GMC Van AM/FM radio - I don't necessarily need my reference rig to feel emotional - it is the music, not the equipment - - - hmm - - - but on the other hand ( : Later my friend!
I am not convinced, unfortunately. Will be, after there will be a blind comparison between those DACs and some other cheap DACs. Similar tests consistently show that the difference between 1000 dollars DAC and the DACs inside the AVRs for example is negligible, and cannot be systematically and consistently determined nor by the trained or casual listeners. That means that by buying a 1000 dollar DAC, someone is just wasting their money.
@@bayshorepark1231239 hi, just search for the phrase 'dac comparison blind' on Google. The first link will be a forum that will provide plenty of tests.
As Paul said, the real clever bit with DAC chips is how it’s implemented. Not just the DAC chip. Try listening to a well implemented Wolfson or ESS or Chord DAC. Cheers.
Nope, not communist Chinese. Both AKM and ESS are made in factories in Japan. Burr Brown was bought out by Texas Instruments a few years ago, so I'm not sure where those are made.
Yes you do, unless you are only listening to vinyl or tapes. DACs are required for listening to CDs, DVD-Audio, SACD, and streaming audio from sources like Tidal or Qobuz. And if you are into DSD instead of PCM, you'll need a really, really good one - and a way of feeding it.
Lol your Ted Smiths dacs not so great .. lol noisy hissy i have the direct stream 4 yrs missing data unclear vocals cant discern right . Su 10 smsl kills it lmao and the gaincell dac i had thats a wreck in a box all rough turning volume knob .. All your gear hissy poppy and more 😂
The standard is to pronounce acronyms as words when it flows. I don't believe for a second that you pronounce each individual letter in acronyms like LASER, RADAR, TASER, NATO, IKEA, etc.
First DAC is $4000 … daaaamn. Mine was a Geshelli Labs J2 at circa $500 and a LPS circa $160, so circa $660. I picked the wrong career path to get a first DAC at $4000!
I think most of the price of that J2 is the woodworking, IIRC… unless you upgraded the OPAMPs or something?
My J1 was closer to $250
DACs in excess of $500 are a waste of money
Not necessarily a waste, but absolutely encountering diminishing returns ... 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘪𝘧𝘪 (save perhaps acoustic treatment, which is likely a linear, 1:1 relationship).
@@ocelotxpDACs in excess of $1000 are NOT a waste of money if the rest of your system - and your ears - can tell they make a positive influence on the realism of the sound. It's all about buying price commensurate pieces of gear so there are no bottlenecks in your overall system.
If you have a $2000 amp, a $1500 preamp, and $5000 speakers, you'd be foolish to feed them with a $500 DAC when you could double that and hear a marked difference in sound quality and enjoyment.
People spend $30K on a car and get maybe four years use from it. You can spend half that on a very good stereo system and get 25 years use out of it.
Most people will seriously struggle to buy a DAC in the $500 to $1,500 range. I can't imagine spending $4,000 on a first DAC, especially when DAC technology changes so fast.
@@ocelotxpi'm inclined to say you are right but the stellar gold pro or whatever it is called is class a with 4 dac chips per channel, I really want to listen to something like that
Hi Paul! I think you gave a really great advice here. I am a proud owner of the MKII and I believe it is one of the best DAC's in the world that money can buy. But I would not recommend it for someone to buy as its very first DAC. This is really very advanced stuff...!!!
I never thought I would own anything PS Audio, but I really enjoy my Stellar Gaincell DAC. It replaced a Denafrips Venus II 12th DAC, something I never saw coming. I use vintage gear, currently a 1970 Sansui 4000 stereo receiver, and use the Gaincell for my digital gear. It took quite a few years, and tens of thousands of dollars, but I finally have the sound I have been looking for. I am running the Zu DW6 Supreme speakers.
My starter setup also using Sansui paired with PS Audio DAC. 😄A recommendation from a local hifi dealer. I'm running Sansui AU217 & PS Audio Digital Link III. I hope one day I can buy the higher tier dac from PS audio
@@jlmjloi4533I am thoroughly impressed with the Gaincell, it is simply buttery smooth, no digital harshness that I have experienced with other chip DACs. And with the Sansui, simply incredible, it brings out all of that magic the Sansui is known for and keeps that airy tube like sound pouring out of my Zu speakers.
I never thought I would sell my Venus II 12th DAC for a used $800 Gaincell, but here we are. This is one of those DACs that I simply do not see leaving, it does everything right and is very honest. I forget the engineers name that developed the Gaincell, he is now over at Parasound as the head engineer. That guy knows his stuff.
I just looked at the starting price, it should be called "sellar Paincell" instead.
@@harackmw I only paid $800, delivered. Don't knock it until you try it.
Answer? 100k Dac plus a 100k reclocker,,, with 20k cables…your good to go😂😂😂
True that
Well for under $100K, there is the $77K CH Precision C1.2 dual mono DAC with some options for an additional $6K that should be fine.
Nah, just go with Totaldac, get the d1-sublime. Dual d1-triunity in monobloc + d1-sublime reclocker + power supply for $50k.
@@rosswarren436 Don't forget to buy the 23 000$ power bar and the 13 000$ isolation pad for the speakers...
Love my Gustard X26 Pro DAC ... Dual ES9038Pro chips, beefy power supply and fully balanced Class A output stage...
I'm sure all three DACs offered by PS Audio are great, perhaps "stellar", at their price points. But after learning about DACs over the last 5 years, I'm still confused as to what we gain from the various architectures used by engineers. Why for instance, are R2R DACs reputed to have a more "natural tonality, wider soundstage, and better imaging" than similarly priced chip-based alternatives? Is this RUclips reviewer hype or is it real, and if real, what is the technical explanation for it? Why would an old architecture like R2R that was superseded long ago by chip-based designs be "better"? And what is going on with the programming in a FPGA that does the D to A conversion that makes it better than what is designed into say an ESS, AKM, or Burr Brown chip that has the same job to do? Thanks. And thanks for the explanation about how important the output stage is to what we hear.
The short answer is a lot confirmation bias is at play, and people buy into the marketing; even manufacturers. If manufacturers published video footage of people doing blind tests and choosing the more expensive or even different dacs consistently they would make way more sales. But for some reason you never see that, I wonder why 😏
@@harackmw but some reviewers do comparison tests to ekk out the differences they hear, and come to these conclusions. Yes, if they did double blind tests it would be more truthful, but some try very hard to not be biased. I just watched a review of a comparison between a Denafrips Ares 12th and a Gustard R26, and the reviewer preferred the cheaper Ares, but mentioned the Gustard did offer a much larger soundstage. It just wasn't as tonally accurate.
Let your ears do the work. Order multiple DACs (with generous return policies) and compare them in your system in real time. Invite a friend over and set up your own double blind test.
Yes! I have been thinking the same thing Mike! Being pushed to get into Streaming etc. I decided to take a step back and I just purchased what I hope will be my last Digital setup! The industry has gotten out of hand to say the least! I just found some matching pieces from the early 2000's. A Meitner DAC and SACD Transport that are made to work together! For the price of just 1 DAC I was looking at I bought both pieces for a lot less! Cudos to you Mike for standing up to the Hi Fi hype!
Those three points Paul outlines is what the community is wanting to know about what makes DACS different interns of sound and price 1) Output stage 2) Operation Amp selection 3) DAC operation (Single Chip vs Multi Chip vs FPGA vs other). Thanks Paul.
Dear Paul, I have a SMSL DO200. It's a keeper, it does it all. It can also sound tubey. Best, D.
I would go for a Chinese hi end dac. Half the money, double the pleasure. I've bought a fenomenal LKS MH-DA004 and I can't be happier. Denafrips DACs are also outstanding.
It’s half the money, you think you got a deal until it breaks. Then you realize how difficult Chinese customer support is, and sometimes they blame you for the issue or very unresponsive.
I really like my Stellar Gold DAC..
Stellar Gold sounds like a winner. Am I correct that Darren Myers designed the output stage along the lines of his phono preamp?
IMHO, 4 factors determine the sound of a DAC. The DAC, the output stage, the power supplies, and the phase noise of the clock/data input. The 5th factor is packaging to isolate RF, EMI and vibration.
I know lots of people have asked over the years, but could you please give us a tour of the beautiful looking Modular Moog?
I think you need to use their "ask Paul"-mail and not the comment section 😊
I wonder, the Stellar Gold compared to the older DS MK1… 🤔
Smsl makes good dacs, starting with the su-9, su-9pro and the sux are all great
Yeah, better than many supposedly "high end" dacs...
@@guyboisvert66 💯
I have an Audio Research Ref 9 Cd. This player has one of the best DACs today.
Paul! Is that a system 15 Moog?
I worked at Moog Music in the late 70's.
Wow! I am not sure. Gus cobbled it together. What did you do there?
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio Thanks for your reply. I wish I could say I was an engineer, but alas, I worked in the parts department and shipping. Was surrounded by people who DID put the synthesizers together.
Where are you all talking about why do you need a Dac ? I use a Apogee Rosetta for making music but I don’t understand why listeners need a Ad da
The DAC market is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Either they sound the same or they sound worse than the cheaper sub $500 DAC. If you can disable and completely bypass these internal DACs, your sound would be upgraded with any external. There is so much snake oil in the hifi market, the dac suffers with it the most. Electrical isolation would be the best thing you can do. Im not talking about your AC power.
I *think* some or maybe all of PS Audio's DACs do some opto-isolation (galvanic isolation) from the inputs before the signal gets to the DAC chip or FPGA, hence the noise floor is lowered.
Yeah, agree. But no need of electrical isolation unless you deal with broken or badly designed equipment, async USB is the way to go. A good sub 500$ DAC is already better than human ears and analog components at any price point. I paid 800$ for a Topping D70 Pro Sabre because i wanted 12V trigger, a cheaper model would've been as good.
‘Courtesy DAC’……that is a good term , Paul. My ‘high end’ McIntosh SACD player has one of those. Sounds like hash and grain. As far from high end as you could get. High end CD players are a joke. A quality DAC is definitely necessary.
I got the Otto hat for my raspberry pi. Lol
Better off an SMSL SU-1 in USB async mode, better than human ears...
Very informative. If one throws in the direct stream dac as an option what would you advice? How would it compare to stellar gold?
It’s obvious, the more you spend the better it will sound.
Hahaha
That is often true within a company but not necessarily across companies.
That comes with diminishing returns.
Is a Cadillac better than a Chevrolet?
The answer is not necessarily.
Not always... I am living proof of that, with witnesses.
that's what "they" want you to believe..😉
if you listen mostly to streaming like Tidal, will you hear an improvement going past the gain cell dac?
I own the Gaincell, purchased used for $800 last year, I really like it. It replaced a Denafrips Venus II 12th, I cannot see the new Stellar Gold $4000 DAC in my system any time soon, if ever. Diminishing returns comes to mind... There is no way I am going to get a $3200 sound quality improvement over what the Gaincell is already doing. Personally, I think the Gaincell is a hidden gem in regards to DACs.
Would a built in DAC in my (Audiolab 6000A Play amp) be any better than the DAC in my SAMSUNG tablet? Reviewers seem to like the Audiolab built in DAC.
If you create your soundcard with 2 mic/line ins and 4 outs + 2 headphone outputs, and sound quality that up to your standarts, how much it will costs? And also, are you capable to produce drivers similar to RME, because while I hate their interfaces, they have steller drivers.
Do you have to rely on the built-in amp with the dac chip or can you just run the dac and feed it to your own amp, is that what you're doing Paul?
Instead of the programmable chip why don't you just go discrete and make the dac discrete, thats similar to a ladder dac isn't it that works in the same way.
He explained... they use a discrete chip in the Gaincell and Stellar. Their flagship uses software developed in house. Most people find the MKII the best sounding and it has the advantage of OTA software upgrades as enhancements are developed.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w yes but which stage of amplification is discrete? What's my question
Is he just using the dac chip as a dac chip without its amplifier, because the signal is very small or he's just using the dac part of the chip, without the amplifier, and building his own amplifier discreetly he didn't explain this.
@@hoobsgroove I don't know enough about the ESS chip to comment on any output stage it has built in. Typically there is at least a buffer after a DAC chip to drive the cables and preamp. I believe he claimed the output amp/buffer uses a discrete amp on all three of their DACs.
Channeling Keith Emerson I see.
I want the gold dac
Bob from Kentucky: "Which DAC should I buy?"
Paul: "PS Audio Stellar Gold DAC. Thanks for the question, and your money. Bye!" 🤣
Indeed
rme adi dac 2fs is all you need.
i had it.. moved on to better
Which was?
Denafrips Pontus ii, then i went Terminator ii.... then i settled for Gustard X26 Pro with a U18 DDC .... outperformed the Terminator at half the cost
How much better was it? Cost doesnt seem to be as relevant as most would think.
I look for reason to upgrade from the RME dac. Can’t find one. I just paired it with my Eversolo A6 and it sounds dreamy.
where would R2R ladder DAC's fit into this equation?
As an older technology surpassed by the chip-based DACs or those with custom programming done "better" in a FPGA chip by those who are capable of doing that.
The problem with R2R DACs, according to Paul and others, is that it is very hard to get the values of the resistors all within specs.
In general, it can be said that R2R DACs are "smoother" sounding perhaps, because of their nature. That smoothness fools many into thinking they sound more "analog", but not really.
One issue with their "smoothness" is the lack of bass slam (that's painting with a large brush in generalities, I can only speak about the ones I've heard). Sort of like comparing a Magnepan speaker with one having a 12" bass driver.
Both can sound good - even great - but you have to choose what is important to you.
As Paul has explained, the power supply in a DAC and its output stage and how well isolated everything is goes a long way to making one DAC sound different than another.
I was looking at a R2R DAC in the $2000 range but now am looking more at something like PS Audio's Gaincell DAC.
Meh…
Does anyone know what that is hanging above the mixing console??
A lamp shade.
Trained musicians can't tell what instrument is being played when blind yet audiophiles go on about differences they hear with dacs and cables 😂
Sorry, but your suppositions aren't true. Trained musicians CAN tell which instrument is being played due to its tonality. So can "audiophiles" or those who have decent ears and learn what to listen for. It is easy to tell the difference between two violins, acoustic guitars, or mandolins. They don't sound the same at all. People can hear differences in the presentation of sound between DACs (tonality, soundstage, imaging, how "dark" the background is, how etched the beginning of notes are, how natural is the decay, etc)., and yes, even cables. But no, you don't need to spend $1000 on some RCA interconnects. There is however a huge gain to be made in throwing away the cheap ones and buying some in the $30 range from say, Worlds Best Cables using Amphenol connectors.
Damn proving a false statement with a false statement.
At this point try and hear it yourself. Come back later and tell us how marvelled you were !
Ha Ha! I have had more than a few DACs through here, no blind tests needed to hear the difference. I may not be able to tell you who makes it, but I darn sure can hear the difference they make when speakers are in play. You may want to park the oscilloscope and purchase some speakers.
@rosswarren436 don't take my word for it, look up the blind violin tests on RUclips here for yourself.
@@harackmw👍
I didn’t think a DAC was supposed to SOUND like anything…..
It seems most manufacturers juice their DACs to color the natural sound.
That's the issue in a nutshell and why there is such a difference as you go up the ladder in price. Cheaper DACs often color the sound in some way, either too thin and analytical sounding - which is what Topping and SMSL thought "audiophiles" wanted a few years ago, or intentionally warm and syrupy. Then there is the noise floor (how quiet the background is) which is mostly due to the quality of the power supply and isolation. Then we have how natural the tonality is - does it sound like a real instrument, assuming the rest of the system is as revealing, how natural the attack and decay of notes sound, how wide the soundstage and how good the imaging.
At some point it is almost like they should split DACs into two boxes. One doing the D to A conversion and another box that does the preamplification and let us decide how far up the price ladder we want to go with each.
Disappointing video Paul We could have guessed the dearer DAC sound better but in what way, what is better in their sound? Please elabereate.
make 5.1 DAC for god's sake
Why the PS Stelar
Gold DAC, of course!
First to post, once again.
Cheers from Montreal.
"First to post, once again."
ruclips.net/video/cH8iv4n2kco/видео.html
What a money making racket. They forced digital on everyone which has caused vinyl record prices to sell for 3000% markup, plus the new pressings are crap. Now we are being forced to pay astronomical amount of money to convert digital back to analog via DAC's. What's even worse is no matter which over-priced medium you choose, 80-90% of the time the source recording is garbage, therefore the CD, SACD, Vinyl, etc. is horrible. The latest scam is they are using crappy digital source recordings and pressing it onto vinyl.
Yup, then audiophiles miss that warm chill sound their vinyl used to make and spend thousands or more trying to "warm up" their overly sterile systems to get back there again, or aren't smart enough to realize that is why they can't connect with their music anymore: the gear and fear of missing out takes centerstage instead
Blame the record labels for that, and the lousy recording engineers and the producers who want that overly compressed "loud" sound.
Or you can see the upside which is that high quality digital playback is now the best of both worlds: the natural, pleasing aspects of analog with the precision and accessibility of digital tools. Try an Aurender server feeding a solid DAC and you'll hear what I mean.
@@BradfordWarner What do think about Tidal?
@@Foxtrot1967 I use it and find it AOK even though MQA never impressed me (they now seem to be abandoning it in favor or normal flac files). Qobuz does seem to have more high res files right now and is definitely better for classical.
SMSL SU-1 is $70 and 99% of folks couldn't tell the difference between it and a $1000 dac (blind test).
I could, and still own it, I missed the return window. It sounded like someone threw a wet blanket over my Zu's... No blind test needed.
@@michaelwright1602 I'll take you anytime for a blind test. But we need a blanket so you won't see. ruclips.net/video/BYTlN6wjcvQ/видео.html
I have a dac. It's in my Denon sacd uni player.🤣🤣🤣 Sounds great. My sony es avr has one too that sounds great. Oh snap!
Audio manufacturers don't actually design their own DACs, they buy DAC chipsets and output amps from other suppliers. The only difference is the cost of the chipset, one of the best costs $91. PS Audio doesn't even make the FPGA they use in one of their DACs, they buy it. There's no reason that a mid-priced DAC can't perform as well as DACs costing 10 times more.
Lot's of hype with the DACs, and they all have their own sound. The trick is, finding the sound that pleases your ear...
What are you talking about, Mark? We "buy" a premade FPGA? Yes, and we buy premade resistors and capacitors too. The Xilinx FPGA we buy is empty. No code. The DAC is completely hand coded from the very beginning. You make it sound as if we buy an off the shelf FPGA that just makes a DAC. Please, keep your facts straight. Thanks.
@@Paulmcgowanpsaudio While PS Audio writes the FPGA code, and FPGA DACs used to be much better than audio DAC chipsets, they aren't any longer. There is a big problem with FPGAs. FPGAs have massive computing power but they're optimized for calculation performance, NOT for noise performance. They introduce noise from non-useful elements. In DAC chipsets, everything is there for a purpose and signal and power flows are optimized to reduce noise. The newest DAC chipsets are better than FPGAs for noise and just as good for fidelity at a much lower cost. With the same filtering the two can sound virtually identical. If PS Audio would actually do blind listening tests with a large number of audiophiles, you'd find that out.
@@markmeridian3360 what noise degredation are we talking about? probably like
@@dornauge1995 It's easy to make different amps sound different. Bob Carver proved that. He took a mid-Fi amplifier and made it sound indistinguishable from a $10,000 amp with simple changes to the mid-Fi amp's transfer function. It stood up in double-blind listening tests conducted by Stereophile.
That's the point, modestly priced DACs made with the latest chipsets can be made indistinguishable from (or even perhaps preferable to) extremely expensive DACs with FPGA technology, and are actually slightly better on technical measures that people are unable to hear.
No dacs are not worth it as more than half the music in recording studios is brick walled
It’s starts in the studio
And ends up on hifi costing a fortune not all songs are recorded equally
stick with Geshelli Labs
The McGowan NEVER replies. I wonder why???????????/
Hey, actually that's not entirely true, at least with this video - - I knew the guy yapping about off the shelf stuff was wrong - I'm amazed but pleased Paul set the record straight. btw, completely different subject, nothing to do with you, I'm just sayin' - - no big shocker that this video brought out the hatters ! ( : Gawd, nothing like a DAC discussion to get things going - - - and it's a good thing Paul didn't elaborate on his power cable insight at the beginning of the vid - that woulda brought down the internet servers! Gawd, I'll never get it, if a person really thinks, and I'll say or give in and use the word "generally" that a hundred dollar DAC can compete with a reference rig, then why would they be watching this in the 1st place? Let alone sling mud around implying everyone else that doesn't agree is somehow hypnotized. Anyway, happy listening and I'm with you - just-enjoy-the-music. Cause ya, in the end I can get my rocks off to my stock GMC Van AM/FM radio - I don't necessarily need my reference rig to feel emotional - it is the music, not the equipment - - - hmm - - - but on the other hand ( : Later my friend!
Point taken. OK. Cheers.@@skip1835
I am not convinced, unfortunately. Will be, after there will be a blind comparison between those DACs and some other cheap DACs. Similar tests consistently show that the difference between 1000 dollars DAC and the DACs inside the AVRs for example is negligible, and cannot be systematically and consistently determined nor by the trained or casual listeners. That means that by buying a 1000 dollar DAC, someone is just wasting their money.
you have any quantifiable results you can show?
@@bayshorepark1231239 hi, just search for the phrase 'dac comparison blind' on Google. The first link will be a forum that will provide plenty of tests.
Yes, modern reasonably priced DACs are very good and just as good as the really expensive DACs.
As Paul said, the real clever bit with DAC chips is how it’s implemented. Not just the DAC chip. Try listening to a well implemented Wolfson or ESS or Chord DAC. Cheers.
@@bayshorepark1231239 ruclips.net/video/bpt6cwYFdxs/видео.htmlsi=t7AT9oF3xI051Noy
And they all use the same chinese D to A chips internally, LOL!
"And they all use the same chinese D to A chips internally,"
Nope, not communist Chinese. Both AKM and ESS are made in factories in Japan. Burr Brown was bought out by Texas Instruments a few years ago, so I'm not sure where those are made.
You don't need one at all
Yes you do, unless you are only listening to vinyl or tapes. DACs are required for listening to CDs, DVD-Audio, SACD, and streaming audio from sources like Tidal or Qobuz. And if you are into DSD instead of PCM, you'll need a really, really good one - and a way of feeding it.
@@rosswarren436 no you don't
@@rosswarren436 try any without they'll work just fine
Dacs are useless without a streamer and a streamer is useless without a good/stable internet connection.
That’s weird
I don’t have a single streamer yet get plenty of use out of DACs since the 80’s
I don't think I've ever streamed any kind of music.
I buy physical Media or DSD files.
And I use a Dac for music.
Lol your Ted Smiths dacs not so great .. lol noisy hissy i have the direct stream 4 yrs missing data unclear vocals cant discern right . Su 10 smsl kills it lmao and the gaincell dac i had thats a wreck in a box all rough turning volume knob .. All your gear hissy poppy and more 😂
I wish people would stop saying "DACK" and instead call it a D - A - C.
Why?
What about 🦆?
The standard is to pronounce acronyms as words when it flows. I don't believe for a second that you pronounce each individual letter in acronyms like LASER, RADAR, TASER, NATO, IKEA, etc.
@@Evil_PeterShhhh! I can't hear my A.. B.. B.. A.. album over this argument
Well, at least most don't confuse the issue by trying to pronounce ADC. LOL.